By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
mantlepiecek said:
Seece said:
mantlepiecek said:


LOL.

Common sense says MS is the only one offering online as a subscription. Sony doesn't need to go charging for it, this is like asking if steam is going to charge for online from next-gen, answer is no.

Steam isn't making major losses. Sony need to majorly reform every aspect of their business including the gaming division, and if I were an investor I'd be asking why they're not charging for their online when Microsoft is.

They are a business, but that doesn't mean they will start charging for "offline play" from next gen. I mean, they could charge for offline play as well, because, you know, they are a business and all.

What a ridiculous example

Pay $60 or else you can't play your PS4! So much revenue generated, NOT.

PS+ doesn't make anywhere near the amount of revenue as XBL of course it doesn't. Its just completed its first year on the market. XBL gold didn't generate much in its first year either. Maybe even less than PS +.

In case you didn't know, Sony isn't doing something, weird or unique by offering free online play. They are doing what almost the entire game industry is doing, offering free online play.

The fact of the matter is Sony can charge for online and if they don't they're not acting like a business that isn't making money hand over fist.

The ridiculous example is just as ridiculous as charging for online gaming.

No it isn't, regardless of what you think, MS DO offer a service.

Sony already charges for something else on their PSN, called PS+.

You said that about two posts ago, I already responded to that.

Tell me this, how will Sony explain why they are charging for online gaming when they didn't for the last two gen?

Sony have had to explain far worse, if they can get up their and say $599 on stage, they can very easily charge for online when Microsoft has been doing it for years.

Online gaming is actually becoming cheaper as time goes.